Modifié 11 avr. 2020 à 15 h 21
Quoting: Sebybbq
Actually there a place in the CBA that mentioned that team aren’t supposed to have, for the following season, salary commited over the current salary cap. So if the cap stay put the team are all supposed to be under 81,5 or even. So team will have to figure out by themselves a way to do thing because with the money the players and the owners have lost they won’t be buying out players to lose even more money. The owner still have to pay the players that money doesn’t disappear like magic. And for players like Seabrook or Neal or Lucic they won’t vote in that favor. That will make them loose big time money.
The cap can go down too. I'm not talking about technicalities. I just don't see it happening. AND you can actually go over the cap during the summer. Teams just need to get the act together on Day 1 of the next season.
You logic is skewed to pick (3) different people, but the NHLPA serves ALL players. Including Hall, Pietrangelo, heck every single UFA and RFA. Not just 3 or even 30 players. They represent hundreds of players. The simple fact is that CBOs will give the players MORE money overall. The players being bought out still get 60% of their SALARY. The owners will need to replace the full Cap Hit. Esseintially, the owner CHOOSING to pay extra money to the players. Again...it's a choice. Not one's forced to use a CBO. Melnyk will never use one.
Also, Salary is important because let's use Seabrook as the example. His salary for the next 4 years is $20.5M He'll get 60% of that...$12.3M...IE lose $8.2M, BUT the Hawks will need to replace his Cap hit for the next 4 years. $27.5M. $27.5 > $8.2 So lets pretend you manage the NHL players association. Who do you pick Taylor Hall or Brent Seabrook? The real answer is neither. You represent everyone and the NHLPA should be asking for CBOs because it puts more money into the players hands. That's why it's such an interesting idea.